A new analysis of data by the BBC has highlighted the level of abuse MPs get via Twitter. 

The Local Democracy Reporting Service analysed almost three million tweets mentioning MPs over a six-week period to find out just how much of that could be classed as abuse. 

More than 130,000 of the 2.9 million monitored tweets were deemed to be 'toxic', which is defined as a rude, disrespectful or unreasonable comment that is likely to make someone want to leave a conversation. 

The most abused MP in terms of percentage was Mansfield's Ben Bradley with 13.5 per cent of 4,827 Tweets being toxic. He has caused numerous social media storms over his outspoken views over a number of years. He has been branded 'right wing' and an 'evil misogynist' among many comments, many in response to his views on free school meals, describing the National Trust as "woke", speaking out on educational attainment for white working class boys and calls for a 'Minister for Men'. 

The person who received the most toxic Tweets was former Prime Minster Boris Johnson, with 18,907 out of more than half a million messages and it appears abuse goes hand-in-hand with the job, current PM Rishi Sunak got 9,258 toxic tweets 

Former Prime Minister Liz Truss got the second, most with 5642 toxic Tweets. 

Being in opposition doesn't mean you don't get abuse, Labour leader Sir Kier Starmer got 8,109 toxic tweets out of just more than 200,000 messages. 

Mid-Bedfordshire MP Nadine Dorries, who has led a campaign against online abuse received 9,244 offensive messages out of 78,731 analysed. 

Another 'high-scorer' in the receipt of abuse stakes was Jacob Rees-Mogg, with 4,508 toxic messages. 

Twitter has previously said it is committed to combatting abuse as outlined in its Hateful Conduct Policy.

It posted : "We are committed to combating abuse motivated by hatred, prejudice or intolerance, particularly abuse that seeks to silence the voices of those who have been historically marginalized.

"For this reason, we prohibit behaviour that targets individuals or groups with abuse based on their perceived membership in a protected category."

The company has also previously pointed out it has a much more open platform than other social media companies, which allows researchers to "enhance and research the public conversation".